Tom: From what I can see, the XL basically allows for more than 100 speaker cab sims as well as a fool-proof on board back up system. I really don't know the extent of what it does. I only checked to see if it had more power for seamless program changes without using "scenes" but it doesn't, so I didn't pay any mind to it other than briefly checking into it.
 
I don't need to have more than 20 cabs loaded let alone 100 that mine can store. The XL is 400 I believe. The fool-proof back-up thing...you sort of get with the Mark II and you CAN get it for an additional $7 with shipping included by purchasing the ROM chip. With all software, sometimes you can get a glitch that makes the unit stop working after a firmware update. It's rare but it DOES happen. The ROM chip resets everything and you're back up and running. Without the ROM, you have to send the unit back. The XL has it built in. You have to ask yourself if it's worth the extra money really.
 
I really don't think you'll need the XL, then again, with this company, God knows what "future" means. The dude updates the unit just about monthly to a state that basically gives you a brand new pre-amp with more ground-breaking innovation. Sometimes it's the update you need, other times you're better off leaving things alone with an older firmware because sometimes it totally changes your patches. As long as you have things backed up with each firmware, you never have a problem.
 
For example, if I find I'm not liking my tone as much now with build 15.3, I can go back to 12.0 and restore all the stuff I had then. So it's a really good system to have. It also gives you a chance to see how far you and Fractal have come along. I've been updating my sounds and my firmware since version 9 I believe. Listening to my sounds now compared to then along with how far the unit has come in less than a year since I bought mine...and it really blows my doors off.
 
Now my big thing is sampling acoustic guitars and then playing them on my electric...oh man....pure bliss!!! Mic one up or line one in...or both at once...record the wave file, choose a clean sound, run the wave file into your Axe...play along, press the tone match button and you sound  as much like an acoustic as you can with an electric! :) I'm gravitating more towards sampling individual sounds more so than modeling my amps. I'd rather sample the best sounds in my amps that I use as it makes more sense to me. :) Most times with an amp, you only get 1-3 great sounds out of it. So heck, sample each sound and call it a day. :)
 
-Danny

Ah there we go. You know more about it than I do. LOL!
 
I guess one would have to think about whether the above is worth $400. In my honest opinion looking at that list, VALUE knob and built-in backup are the only things I would want for myself personally that I don't currently have. Do any of us really need 512 presets or speaker cabs? LOL! That's insanity!
 
The other stuff could be cool depending on your situation. A lot of the pro's that use it are not using the pre-amp part, so the midi thru jack would be important to them. Why they aren't....I wish I knew as this thing holds up to any of the amps I have. It even gives the dual rectum fryer a serious run and is close enough for me.
 
I'm not using any other midi gear so I just use the MFC port which is cat 5 cable....no need for FASlink.
 
Two onboard pedal jacks works if you are creating your own pedal board and aren't using an MFC 101. What it does is...allows you to run two controller pedals (with long cables) to the Axe. If you have the MFC, you have pedal ports in there which allow you to use super short cables.
 
Mine looks like this. One cable and I'm done. And...it's WAY smaller than it looks, honest. It's about 16 inches in length. (the actual Fractal MFC pedal board)
 
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4909348/WP_000197.jpg
 
Value knob sounds interesting. I never thought about mine having a life span. Hahaha!
 
Secret Sauce? Umm...not sure where they are going with that one, but this thing has 0 noise for me. Even with extreme gain, the gate takes care of everything and doesn't choke off your sound. That's one thing that I've found incredibly impressive.
 
The X/Y thing sounds impressive too, however, unless it DID offer more processing power, none of this really makes a difference for me.
 
Built in back up...definitely a plus there. However, you can easily remedy this either with a little midi device like an old Yamaha MDF 2 or any other midi box that can back-up and send presets. If you bring a laptop or some sort of notebook, all you need is your Axe preset banks and a USB cable and you can reload your sounds in a catastrophe in about a minute. As long as the unit stays on, it will keep your sounds in memory. Now for a total system failure, this is where the $7 ROM card I mentioned comes in handy. The downside is you have to install it and use jumpers to initiate it. The XL has this already...so, it may be worth $400 to have this capability if you're playing live and the unthinkable happens. Really this is the only option worth anything to me. But $400....I'm on the fence there.
 
-Danny

Hey Beeps....will try to get back to that other thread too...but might be able to say it all here. :)
 
Guitar sims really rely on the cab sims that are associated with them. The other side of the coin is how good the sim is itself and then of course they work even better when you have a nice conditioned signal going in.
 
As for your board, the aux outs should work fine going where you need them to go. I did some checking and low and behold, I'm sending a few of mine to my net box which has a Realtek....so I'm sort of doing the same thing you are in THAT situation.
 
So if you are sending signals into your Mackie, I would recommend some sort of processor in the line. For example, if you picked up one of those old ART pre-amps from the 80's cheap on Ebay for whatever they go for or some sort of Chandler tube driver or something, you could condition your signal going in to the sims really good. I have had the best luck with my tube pre-amp (Digitech 2101 with everything bypassed other than the clean tube pre and a little compression from it...so it's clean with no other effects) or with an outboard compressor (you can go cheap...Behringer, Samson, Alesis) and a stomp box like say a Tube Screamer, Boss Compressor Sustainer or even a Boss over-drive.
 
The pedals sort of push the line signal a bit the way you get a bit of buffered signal in a real amp. This allows you to get sustain instead of "just distortion" like you get with amp sims. They always fall short with actual feel or sustain (this is why I brought up the Fractal...it's nothing remotely close to any VST and can't be compared) so these methods will help get a bit of that back in.
 
So if you drive the signal a bit in a good way and compress it just right, you're conditioning the signal and it will behave quite well in a VST sim. So try setting something up like that if possible, go through your Mackie and then send it out to the sim. Leave the sim at default as far as levels go and you should be able to control your signals from your console. I try to send at -6 dB into Sonar at all times. There's really no set way other than the way that works for you. Hope all is well my friend. :)
 
-Danny

Hi, guys. That's what I'm thinking the Line6 head is doing (and although I haven't tested the xlr out on the Traynor I'm assuming it will work the same). Those outputs were built specifically to feed a board, or so the manuals say. It is definitely making a big difference in my sound BUT these are solid state amps which are obviously not as good as a nice tube set up and the Line6 is OOOLLLD technology so once the faux drive/gain gets turned up it starts getting a little cheesy/fake sounding (so I just run it clean and let the stompboxes/sims do that work.
 
However are you guys saying I should be putting something ELSE in there between the amp and the board? I would very much like a decent tube mic pre that could do hopefully both mic and instrument connections but alas such a device is not in my budget. One thing I've contemplated is finding some schematics, buying some high quality electronics and building one myself (I've known guys who used to do that type of thing and it looks pretty straight forward). Could be a neat project.
 
Another question is... on my "wet" tracks (the ones going through the stomp boxes into the Line6, into the board then into Sonar) is one regarding the "cab" issue Danny speaks of. Since I'm going out of the Line6 and the signal is already effected (it sounds good) I was wondering if maybe tossing an empty sim with JUST a cabinet in it might be a good idea seeing as how there isn't any cab, sim or otherwise, already in the signal. What I'm getting now is VERY in your face and dry and I'm thinking using the TH2 cab models and mic positioning tools could be a good addition to the sound. I'm not sure what would happen to THAT signal within a sim though without an amp model loaded in the sim. It makes sense to me that what the stomp boxes and Line6 are doing would replace what the head sims/effects in TH2 would do before it got to that cab sim part... but I don't know (still have to try it out).
 
One thing that seems to have helped make the signal sound a little more natural and roomy though is simply turning up the reverb controls on each channel of the Line6 (those controls supposedly control an emulation of the original models the L6 is set too... pretty cool). I am not one who likes reverb on my guitar as an effect at ALL but am learning how good a little bit can be for creating a bit of "room" when dealing with direct signals like this. It's also a lot easier to just turn those dials on the amp than screw around with the complex reverbs in Sonar (which are very nice but I have a hard time dialing in for a lot of stuff... need more practice). Just an interesting side not about this particular setup.
 
The other thing I was going to say in my post above is a while back I was looking at one of those Fender Blues Juniors (or whatever they are called... 5-10w tube amp, beige covering, very simple controls). Once I get some more income rolling I definitely want to get some kind of simple tube amp like that so I'm not stuck with the less robust solid state sound (which particularly sucks for my bluesier/jazzier work) and I can drive the tube without getting kicked out of my apartment (hopefully... lol).
 
Considering that most good engineers seem to be able to get some really good sounding tracks happening with just the DI and a sim I figure with all this extra wackiness I'm doing I MUST be able get something decent happening with what I've got in the meantime. If not then... well maybe I just suck. lol... but that is not an option so I'll keep hammering away at it.
 
I should have this most recent offering up in the songs forum in the next month or so. THis project has been all about experimentation whereas the last couple were more about just learning how to bloody well use Sonar. After this I should have a clearer picture of what I need to get what sounds out of my outboard gear and a better understanding of the stranger/more advanced tools in Sonar.
 
Then I hope to just start writing like a fiend because I won't need to contemplate all this fiddle faddle. I will just know.
 
Thanks for the thoughts, guys and it was nice touching base with you Danny.
 
Cheers.

So there are two issues to when using a buffer - the most obvious is what signal is seen AFTER the buffer (i.e. into your first pedal or your interface). The reason I like my VHT Valvulator is because of the way it handles what the guitar sees. The Valvulator literally has a valve (tube) in it, and unlike a lot of cheap crap out there (like old ART tube pre-amps) that run the tubes at ridiculously low voltages, the Valvulator runs the tube at a high voltage. Essentially, it looks like the first tube stage in a tube amp. This gives a different tone and a different feel when playing it than say plugging right into my Mackie. In fact, I plan to use it front of the Axe FX II. I put in a 12AT7 tube, which has much higher headroom than the stock 12AX7, as I don't want any breakup in this stage.
 
you might find that you have a buffered pedal that gives you good results between your guitar and interface (and you should try it). While the interfaces have a "Guitar" button and they change the impedance, I don't think they really focus on making that the best experience possible to the guitar being plugged in...

Thanks Danny,
I think I'm going to get a chance to play with a Kemper this weekend. I've heard it's great for cleaner tones. I tend to use my 64 Super Reverb for those, but I would like a decent clean in the box. I use a LOT of effects though, and as a computer geek, having the software ability to tweak the Axe FX is highly appealing. I think both would do great for amps, but it seems the Axe FX is a clear winner in the effects department.
 
Wish I could play them both but I may have to buy the Axe FX on faith... :)

Hi, Danny. That's what I figured and thanks for following up about the Aux send thing (which I ignored in my last post). I'm starting to formulate some alternate uses for those even if currently I've got the Channel Access points working well for now.

Now this is kind of a combination question for you and smallstonefan (and a reply to smallstonefan)...

In regards to the "buffer" between the guitar and other devices smallstonefan mentioned. I've always operated on the assumption that an instrument level signal (most importantly my guitar) absolutely requires something to bring it up to proper input levels BEFORE being attached to a mixer input.

I figured in my ignorance this was some kind of magic electronics voodoo that simply must be obeyed. I've attached guitars directly to mixers in the past just to see what would happen and I'd be able to get a signal but it was always very weak and crummy sounding so I just followed the premise of "don't connect a guitar straight to a mixer because it sucks". Those were all really pretty crappy mixers though that the Mackie puts to shame. I will be doing some experiments on my own but the following is kind of where my head has been wandering so if ya'll have the patience to read it maybe you can just say "No, that's stupid. Don't do that." or "Yeah, that might work. Give it a shot".

But seriously this is a pile of crazy so only read/ponder if it is convenient/interests you.

As I learn more about my mixer (and mixers in general) and the various levels that devices output as well as how mixers and other devices can compensate for lower and/or higher signals coming into them I'm wondering... if a mixer can make up for a low output device via input trim and other adjustments and I am using high output pickups (but not active pickups at the moment) is it actually possible to plug a guitar straight into a mixer and get a reasonable signal?

The Mackie specifically talks about being able to take "Instrument Level" input but only alludes to keyboards (which I always figured outputted at a higher level than a guitar). It claims that because of the very wide range that the input trim has that it can manage all sorts of input levels so maybe... just MAYBE I could use it as a splitter.

I am very skeptical but I also remember yourself, Danny, talking about plugging straight into your mixer for certain things and then out to various doodads but didn't quite grasp whether you meant straight into the mixer or whether there was always something in between the guit and the mixer or whether it was a fancy mixer that could bring guitar outputs up to the proper level.

So the basic question at this point I guess is... does the so called "Hi-Z" do anything more than turn up the volume being recieved by the guitar? If so... what? If not how much db should added to compensate?


Aaaaand now I'm gonna start getting weirder so if you've gotten this far maybe you want to just ignore the rest buuuuuut....


I have a pile of Boss and other pedals that all have output level controls which raise levels up and maybe add some "buffer" (I did used to use pedals in between my guitar and the multi in on my Layla which I think has some kind of auto detect for Hi-Z and it worked well enough).


Aside from not getting all the sweet textures provided by running through an amp or a pre is there REALLY anything wrong with plugging the guitar straight into a mixer (or into a pedal then the mixer) IF you are able to compensate for the lower volume on the board or elsewhere (after it is outputted to other devices or the DAW)?

I'm starting to get the impression the only problem is that it is quieter and turning it up would raise the noise floor BUT if there were say a Boss pedal with an output control to raise the level BEFORE it hit the mixer perhaps that could help.

The Mackie trim is set so that if you have it set to it's lowest point, but it is receiving a signal from a pro output device at +4db when you turn up the fader to Unity you will hear it at proper levels and it should be all good.

At it's HIGHEST setting it can take a -10db output and bring it up to that +4db. I'm under the impression the output from even a high gain guitar pickup is still below -10db BUT that could be compensated by increasing the output on a pedal (such as one of my Boss pedals) and/or turning up the fader (there is a LOT more room above unity on this mixer) or made up for after it is outputted from the mixer (like in the DAW or perhaps routed back out to another hardware device such as an amp).


aaaand now where can I send those signals....



So if all that is possible with minimal sound degradation then I'd like to know whether the mixer line outs could actually be routed out to a guitar amp's input jack. Now I wouldn't expect that to be possible but hey... I'm dreaming and scheming here so maybe if I used the Aux outs with the output level control perhaps just nudging it up a little (as opposed to unity) maybe that could mimic the signal the input jack would receive from a guitar. If this is possible it could go to the Line6, the Traynor or the other weird little amps I have around (or maybe power amps for stereos I have or other mixers or amps I haul out of garbage or borrow or build myself, etc)

My Traynor has a "Low" input jack that, based on the archaic manual, implies it can be used to take input from a mixer turning the amp into a monitor (it also says to use it for high output guitars if you want more range out of the drive channel but the thing is from the 60's so their idea of Hi Gain is a little... well not modern and it isn't really that great for plugging straight into IMO). So maybe that input could get fed by the mixer then fed out the XLR line out back into another channel on the mixer and then into the DAW.

That would allow for a LOT of crazy routing options for me and put every piece of rig I have in action at once.

So yeah... that is all a little crazy (sorry) but I really want to get my head wrapped around what I can and cannot get away with in regards to my hardware and input routing now that I FINALLY have been physically hooking things up. I'm learning a lot on my own but you guys ALWAYS give me many new things to consider even if I can't afford the more proper devices that get recommended.

Hey... if Tom Waits can record some of his insanity sitting in the middle of a junk heap and connecting all sorts of ridiculousness to other ridiculousness why can't I, eh? lol

Cheers and sorry for being crazy... but hey... that's what makes a beeps a beepster... or something.

Cool. Very instructive and simple and cuts down my meandering query above to this...
 
IF I were to plug straight into the mixer...
 
1) What can I expect the output coming direct from my guitar to be using...
 
a) a standard humbucker (not an active one)
 
b) a standard single coil (again not an active one if such a thing exists)
 
I am assuming it is far less than the -6db you mention (and my studies have indicated this as well) but I'm really curious as to exactly how much a guitar will output plugged when plugged in this way.
 
All for purely scientific purposes of course. ;-)
 
As always thank you for taking the time to further my knowledge.

That indeed has helped me wrap my head around some stuff, Danny. I was making some faulty assumptions about how current bounces around between devices (or doesn't) to feed/draw signal. I need to take a damned electronics course at some point because I get all confuzzled when looking at the various symbols/terminology and trying to grasp basic concepts.
 
I'm still going to try plugging the guit right in to the Mackie see how much noise the board produces and how much juice I can get but I won't bother entertaining the idea that that is an acceptable input method (which as I said was what I've basically what I thought for many years until recently).
 
It is however interesting to know that there are boards, like your Berhinger, that are designed for such connections. To me using an actual board to grab a dry signal instead of a splitter/DI box is much more appealing for the obviously superior routing possibilities.
 
I also came up with a good reason to use the 6 aux outs on the board as opposed to the 8 direct outs (if as you say the aux outs are nice and clean). Considering every channel on the board (all 16) has access to the Aux outs (and can access any of the six AND can access 4 of those aux's at one time) then I can set up cables, outboard gear like the Line6/Traynor amps, mics, etc and then set the input trim and EQ for those devices so they sound best. Then I simply have one of my snakes run from the six aux outputs into the six line inputs on the back of the Scarlett. From there instead of having to move cables around and reset channel trims/eq's on the Mackie I can just turn up the appropriate Aux knob on that channel to feed the Scarlett.
 
The direct outs/channel access connections are limited to the first 8 channels on the Mackie and can only be use with the corresponding channel (unlike the aux outs that can take signal from any channel).
 
So here's what I'm thinking (keeping in mind that Scarlett In 1 and 2 are the multi ins on the front which I would rather keep free so if I want to just plug straight in to write something or jam out without firing up all the other gear I can OR I can use the direct outs on the Mackie for special input set ups that I don't need set up all the time)...
 
Mackie Aux Out 1 = Scarlett Line In 3
Mackie Aux Out 2 = Scarlett Line In 4
Mackie Aux Out 3 = Scarlett Line In 5
Mackie Aux Out 4 = Scarlett Line In 6
Mackie Aux Out 5 = Scarlett Line In 7
Mackie Aux Out 6 = Scarlett Line In 8
 
Then I use the 9-16 channels on the Mackie to set up gear I think I will be likely to use on a regular basis, set the ideal trim and EQ and bingo bango... I can just turn on the mixer, turn up the fader to unity, turn up the appropriate Aux level knob on the mixer channel(s) to unity (or whatever I want or even mix and match for blending channels into a single track). If I run out of space within those 8 channels (9-16) I can start creeping backward into the 1-8 channels. Why keep the first 8 channels open? I guess it doesn't REALLY matter aside from organization but the first 8 have the direct outs and I only have two 8 channel snakes (one of which has two bad cables so it is essentially a 6 channel snake). So I would opt to use the direct outs for those eight channels and use them as wild cards or specifically for the TRUE use of the Channel Access which is with a TRS cable sending and receiving from outboard gear (it's an insert... not that I currently have any gear that works like that at the moment but you never know what might come down the pipe). I COULD still use the Aux on those channels anyway but I like keeping things straight in my head because this is all confusing enough as it is. lol
 
So yeah... it's been almost a week since I started really messing with the board but provided I don't run into any stupid noise problems I think this might be a good plan. Even if I do run into a bit of noise with the Aux outs (due to stomp boxes running through the external gear or something) then I can fall back on the direct outs as needed which is a good reason to keep the multi ins 1/2 on the Scarlett free as well.
 
I get the benefits of a permanent patch bay type set up and still have a ton of flexibility. Cool!
 
Guess I should post that in the original thread about this though but the convo seemed to have wandered over here.
 
Thanks again, Danny and to you as well smallstonefan.
 
Cheers.

I've got an Axe FX II coming in on Tuesday of next week.
I am SO STOKED to check this thing out! :)

Promise! I've got some travelling to do and I'm back Thursday. I promised my wife I wouldn't open it until my return. 

Yeah Tom, I did. Being in the software business, I'm always leery about being left behind with updates. In my head I can easily conceive of some future feature that only works on the XL. I figured this was such a big investment (can I call it an investment?) that it was a bit of an insurance policy for the future to spend the extra bucks now.
 
I haven't raised the scratch for the floor board yet, but that's next on my list...

I started with the Fender and Orange collection, Sharke and those 2 sold me. I picked up the whole collection last time they did there group buys. I find the Amplitube sims very hard to beat. The best ones seem to be the newest sims, which only makes sense.

I really like the new S Gear, 57 amp they added to their sim collection as well. I haven't used it in a song yet to see how it sits in the mix, but just playing it solo, it sounds awesome. The way these new sims react while I am playing are close enough for me, that I don't notice really that I am playing a sim. Once in a mix, fx, compression, limiting, I think they sound great. I keep having songs forum guys tell me that my tone is really good.

If I played live a lot, then it would be a no brainer to go the Axe Fx route. For me, the little that I play live, my real tube rig and a handful of pedals gets me by, for now.

I've always had mixed feelings about AT - though the Hi Z button on the Mackie board recently made a world of difference in its favour.
 
One thing I've always found though is that, of all the amp sims I own, AT is the most "lively".  At times, other amp sims may nail certain amp sounds a little better and impulses can be more pleasant (the fact that they typically produce much more low end than the AT cab sim probably contributes to that impression) but in the end, they always sound a bit static by comparison. To me.
 
I can't speak for Axe FX or Kemper, my observation is based on what I own - POD, POD HD and practically every software amp sim available on my platform.